Selected quad for the lemma: opinion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
opinion_n	mortal_a	sin_n	venial_a	597	5	12.4318	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A71177	Symbolon theologikon, or, A collection of polemicall discourses wherein the Church of England, in its worst as well as more flourishing condition, is defended in many material points, against the attempts of the papists on one hand, and the fanaticks on the other : together with some additional pieces addressed to the promotion of practical religion and daily devotion / by Jer. Taylor ...	Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667.	1674 (1674)	Wing T399; ESTC R17669	1,679,274	1,048

Disswasive from Popery The First Part. THE Introduction 285 Chap. I. The doctrine of the Roman Church in the controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive 286 Sect. 1. That our Religion is but that their Religion is not such is proved in general first from their challenging power of making new Articles and secondly from the practice of their Indices Expurgatory with some instances of their Innovating 286 2. They Innovate in pretending power to make new Articles 290 3. They did Innovate in their doctrine of Indulgences 291 4. In their doctrine and practice about Purgatory 294 5. In their doctrine of Transubstantiation 297 6. They Innovate in their doctrine of the Half-Communion 30● 7. In that they suffer not their publick Prayers to be in a language vulgarly understood 303 8. In requiring the adoration of Images 305 9. In picturing God the Father and the Bl. Trinity 307 10. In arrogating to the Pope an universal Bishoprick 308 11. A Miscellany of many other doctrines and practices wherein that Church has Innovated Chap. II. They maintain Doctrines and Practices in opposition to us that are direct impieties and certainly destroy good life 312 Sect. 1. Such is their doctrine of Repentance 312 2. And Confession 315 3. Of Penances and Satisfactions 316 4 5. Their doctrine about Pardon and Indulgences Contrition and Satisfaction 318 6. Satisfaction and habitual sins distinction of Mortal and Venial sins by which they contract their Repentance and their Sins and mistake in cases of Conscience 322 7. Their teaching now of late that a probable opinion for which the authority of one Doctor is sufficient may in practice be safely followed 324 8. That Prayers are accepted by God ex opere operato 327 9. Such is their practice of Invocating dead Saints as Deliverers 329 10. And of Exorcising possessed persons 333 11. Sacramentals such as Holy-water Paschal-wax Agnus Dei c. 336 12. The worship of Images is Idolatry and to worship the Host. 337 13. The Summ and Conclusion of the whole Chapter 337 Chap. III. Their Docrines are such as destroy Christian Society in general and Monarchy in particular 340 Sect. 1. As equivocation mental reservation taught and defended by them c. 340 Their teaching that faith is not to be kept with Hereticks dispensing with Oaths Dissolving the bonds of duty 341 They teach the Pope has power to dispense with all the Laws of God and to dissolve contracts 2. Their Exemption of the Clergie from the secular authority as to their Estates and Persons even in matters of Theft Murder and Treason c. and the divine right of the seal of Confession 343 3. By subjecting all Christian Kings to the Pope who can as they teach depose and excommunicate Kings and that Subjects are bound to expel Heretical Kings The Second Part of the Disswasive THe Introduction containing an answer to the Fourth Appendix of J. S. his Sure-footing 351 Lib. I. Sect. 1. Of the Church that the Church of Rome relies upon no certain foundation for their Faith Of Councils and their authority the Canon Law and the great contrariety in it Of the Pope of the notes of the Church 381 2. Of the sufficiency of H. Scripture to Salvation which is the foundation and ground of the Protestant Religion The sufficiency of Scripture proved by Tradition 405 3. Of Traditions and those doctrines and practices that most need the help of that Topick as of the Trinity Paedo-Baptism Baptism by Hereticks and the Lords day 420 4. There is nothing of necessity to be believed which the Apostolical Churches did not believe 436 5. That the Church of Rome pretends to a power of introducing into the Confession of the Church new Articles of Faith and endeavours to alter and suppress the old Catholick doctrine 446 First They do it and pretend to a power of doing it Secondly That it agrees with their interest so to do 452 6. They use indirect ways to bring their new Articles into credit e. g. the device of Indices Expurgatorii 454 First That the King of Spain gave a Commission to the Inquisitors to purge Catholick Authors Secondly That they purged the very Indices of the Father's works Thirdly They did purge the Writings of the Fathers too 7. While they enlarge the Faith they destroy Charity 459 8. The insecurity of the Roman Religion 466 9. That the Church of Rome does teach for doctrines the commandments of men 471 10. Of the Seal of Confession the First Instance 473 11. The Second Instance is the imposing Auricular Confession upon Consciences as a Commandment of God 477 First For which there is no ground in holy Scripture 479 Secondly Nor in Ecclesiastical Tradition either of the Latin or Greek Church 491 Lib. II. Sect. 1. Of Indulgences and Pilgrimages 495 2. Of Purgatory The testimonies of Roffensis Polyd. Virgil c. Alphonsus à Castro are vindicated 500 It is proved that Purgatory is not a consequent to the doctrine of Prayer for the dead 501 The Fathers made Prayers for those whom they believed not to be in Purgatory 502 And such Prayers are in the Roman Missal 505. The Greek and Latin Fathers teach that no Soul enters Heaven till the day of Judgment The doctrine of Purgatory was no Article in S. Austin's time 506. It was not owned by the Greek Fathers 510. It is directly contrary to the ancient Fathers of the Latin Church 512 3. Of Transubstantiation wherein the authorities out of Scotus Odo Cameracensis Roffensis Biel Alph. à Castro Pet. Lombard Durandus Justine Martyr Eusebius S. Augustine are justified from the exceptions of the Adversaries And it is proved that the Council of Laterane did not determine the Article of Transubstantiation but brake up abruptly without making any Canons at all 516 4. Of the Half-Communion 528 Of the Decree of the Council of Constance 528. The authority of S. Ambrose 530. and S. Cyprian 531 5. Of the Scriptures and Service in an unknown tongue 532 S. Basils authority S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Austin Aquinas Lyra. 6. Of the Worship of Images 535 1o. The Quotations vindicated 536. of S. Cyril Chrysostom Epiphanius Austin Council of Eliberis Nicene II. Francfort First The Council of Francfort condemned the Nicene II. 540 Secondly They commanded that it should not be called a General Council ibid. Thirdly The acts of it are in the Capitular of the Emperor written in the time of the Synod 541 Of Tertullian 541. Clemens Alexandrinus 542. Origen 543. 2o. The Quotations alledged by them answered as of S. Basil S. Athanasius 544. S. Chrysostom 545. 3o. The truth confirmed 545 First Image-worship came from Simon Magus ibid. Secondly Heathens spake against it 546 Thirdly Christians did abominate it ibid. Fourthly The Heathens never charged the Christians with it ibid. Fifthly The Primitive Fathers never taught those distinctions that the Papists use to discern lawful Idolatry from Heathen Idolatry 547 Sixthly The Second Commandment is against it ibid.

little for vanity and a little in hypocrisie but a great deal for peace and quiet that the rest of the mind may not be disturbed that we may live and die in peace and in a good opinion of our selves These indeed are evil measures but such by which we usually make judgment of our actions and are therefore likely to call great sins little and little sins none at all ** 47. II. That any sins are venial being only because of the state of grace and Repentance under which they are admitted what condition a man is in even for the smallest sins he can no more know than he can tell that all his other sins are pardon'd that his Repentance is accepted that nothing of Gods anger is reserved that he is pleased for all that there is no Judgment behind hanging over his head to strike him for that wherein he was most negligent Now although some men have great and just confidences that they are actually in Gods favour yet all good men have not so For there are coverings sometimes put over the spirits of the best men and there are intermedial and doubtful states of men as I shall represent in the Chapter of Actual sins there are also ebbings and flowings of sin and pardon and therefore none but God only knows how long this state of veniality and pardon will last and therefore as no man can pronounce concerning any kind of sins that they are in themselves venial so neither can he know concerning his own or any mans particular state that any such sins are pardon'd or Venial to him He that lives a good life will find it so in its own case and in the event of things and that 's all which can be said as to this particular and it is well it is so ne studium proficiendi ad omnia peccata cavenda pigres●at as S. Austin well observed If it were otherwise and that sins in their own nature by venial and not venial are distinguished and separate in their natures from each other and that some of them are of so easie remedy and inconsiderable a guilt they would never become earnest to avoid all 48. III. There are some sins which indeed seem venial and were they not sentenc'd in Scripture with severe words would pass for trifles but in Scripturis demonstrantur opinione graviora as S. Austin notes they are by the word of God declared to be greater than they are thought to be and we have reason to judge so concerning many instances in which men are too easie and cruelly kind unto themselves S. Paul said I had not known concupiscence to be a sin if the law had not said Thou shalt not lust and we use to call them scrupulous and phantastick persons who make much adoe about a careless word and call themselves to severe account for every thought and are troubled for every morsel they eat when it can be disputed whether it might not better have been spared Who could have guessed that calling my enemy Fool should be so great a matter but because we are told that it is so told by him that shall be our Judge who shall call us to account for every idle word we may well think that the measures which men usually make by their customes and false principles and their own necessities lest they by themselves should be condemned are weak and fallacious and therefore whatsoever can be of truth in the difference of sins may become a danger to them who desire to distinguish them but can bring no advantages to the interests of piety and a holy life 49. IV. We only account those sins great which are unusual which rush violently against the conscience because men have not been acquainted with them Peccata sola inusitata exhorrescimus usitata verò diligimus But those which they act every day they suppose them to be small quotidianae incursiones the unavoidable acts of every day and by degrees our spirit is reconciled to them conversing with them as with a tame wolf who by custome hath forgotten the circumstances of his barbarous nature but is a wolf still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Synesius calls them the little customes of sinning men think ought to be dissembled This was so of old Caesarius Bishop of Arles complain'd of it in his time Verè dico Fratres c. I say truly to you Brethren this thing according to the Law and Commandment of our Lord never was lawful neither is it nor shall it ever be but as if it were worse ita peccata ista in consuetudinem missa sunt tanti sunt qui illa faciunt ut jam quasi ex licito fieri credantur these sins are so usual and common that men now begin to think them lawful And indeed who can do a sin every day and think it great and highly damnable If he think so it will be very uneasie for him to keep it but if he will keep it he will also endeavour to get some protection or excuse for it something to warrant or something to undervalue it and at last it shall be accounted venial and by some means or other reconcileable with the hopes of heaven He that is used to oppress the poor every day thinks he is a charitable man if he lets them go away with any thing he could have taken from them But he is not troubled in conscience for detayning the wages of the hireling with deferring to do justice with little arts of exaction and lessening their provisions For since nothing is great or little but in comparison with something else he accounts his sin small because he commits greater and he that can suffer the greatest burthen shrinks not under a lighter weight and upon this account it is impossible but such men must be deceiv'd and die 50. VII Let no man think that his venial or smaller sins shall be pardoned for the smalness of their matter and in a distinct account for a man is not quit of the smallest but by being also quit of the greatest for God does not pardon any sin to him that remains his enemy and therefore unless the man be a good man and in the state of grace he cannot hope that his venial sins can be in any sence indulg'd they increase the burden of the other and are like little stones laid upon a shoulder already crushed with an unequal load Either God pardons the greatest or the least stand uncancell'd 51. VIII Although God never pardons the smallest without the greatest yet he sometimes retains the smallest of them whos 's greatest he hath pardon'd The reason is because although a man be in the state of grace and of the Divine favour and God will not destroy his servants for every calamity of theirs yet he will not suffer any thing that is amiss in them A Father never pardons the small offences of his son who is in rebellion against him those little offences cannot pretend to

this Discourse teaches or encourages variety of Sects and contradiction in Opinions but supposes them already in being and therefore since there are and ever were and ever will be variety of Opinions because there is variety of humane understandings and uncertainty in things no man should be too forward in determining all Questions nor so forward in prescribing to others nor invade that liberty which God hath left to us intire by propounding many things obscurely and by exempting our souls and understandings from all power externally compulsory So that the restraint is laid upon mens tyranny but no licence given to mens Opinions they are not considered in any of the Conclusions but in the Premisses onely as an Argument to exhort to charity So that if I perswade a licence of discrediting any thing which God hath commanded us to believe and allow a liberty where God hath not allowed it let it be shewn and let the Objection press as hard as it can but to say that men are too forward in condemning where God hath declared no sentence nor prescribed any Rule is to disswade from tyranny not to encourage licentiousness is to take away a licence of judging not to give a licence of dogmatizing what every one please or as may best serve his turn And for the other part of the Objection Fifthly This Discourse is so far from giving leave to men to profess any thing though they believe the contrary that it takes order that no man shall be put to it for I earnestly contend that another man's Opinion shall be no rule to mine and that my Opinion shall be no snare and prejudice to myself that men use one another so charitably and so gently that no errour or violence tempt men to Hypocrisie this very thing being one of the Arguments I use to perswade permissions lest compulsion introduce Hypocrisie and make sincerity troublesome and unsafe Sixthly If men would not call all Opinions by the name of Religion and superstructures by the name of fundamental Articles and all fancies by the glorious appellative of Faith this Objection would have no pretence or footing so that it is the disease of the men not any cause that is ministred by such precepts of charity that makes them perpetually clamorous And it would be hard to say that such Physicians are incurious of their Patients and neglectfull of their health who speak against the unreasonableness of such Empiricks that would cut off a man's head if they see but a Wart upon his cheek or a dimple upon his chin or any lines in his face to distinguish him from another man the case is altogether the same and we may as well decree a Wart to be mortal as a various Opinion in re alioqui non necessaria to be capital and damnable For I consider that there are but few Doctrines of Christianity that were ordered to be preached to all the world to every single person and made a necessary Article of his explicite belief Other Doctrines which are all of them not simply necessary are either such as are not clearly revealed or such as are If they be clearly revealed and that I know so too or may but for my own fault I am not to be excused but for this I am to be left to God's judgement unless my fault be externally such as to be cognoscible and punishable in humane Judicatory But then if it be not so revealed but that wise men and good men differ in their opinions it is a clear case it is not inter dogmata necessaria simpliciter and then it is certain I may therefore safely disbelieve it because I may be safely ignorant of it For if I may with innocence be ignorant then to know it or believe it is not simply obligatory ignorance is absolutely inconsistent with such an obligation because it is destructive and a plain negative to its performance and if I doe my honest endeavour to understand it and yet do not attain it it is certain that it is not obligatory to me so much as by accident for no obligation can press the person of a man if it be impossible no man is bound to doe more then his best no man is bound to have an excellent understanding or to be infallible or to be wiser then he can for these are things that are not in his choice and therefore not a matter of a Law nor subject to reward and punishment So that where ignorance of the Article is not a sin there disbelieving it in the right sense or believing it in the wrong is not a breach of any duty essentially or accidentally necessary neither in the thing itself nor to the person that is he is neither bound to the Article nor to any endeavours or antecedent acts of volition and choice and that man who may safely be ignorant of the Proposition is not tied at all to search it out and if not at all to search it then certainly not to find it All the obligation we are capable of is not to be malicious or voluntarily criminal in any kind and then if by accident we find out a Truth we are obliged to believe it and so will every wise or good man doe indeed he cannot doe otherwise But if he disbelieves an Article without malice or design or involuntarily or unknowingly it is a contradiction to say it is a sin to him who might totally have been ignorant of it for that he believes it in the wrong sense it is his ignorance and it is impossible that where he hath heartily endeavoured to find out a Truth that this endeavour should make him guilty of a sin which would never have been laid to his charge if he had taken no pains at all His ignorance in this case is not a fault at all possibly it might if there had been no endeavour to have cur'd it So that there is wholly a mistake in this Proposition For true it is there are some Propositions which if a man never hear of they will not be required of him and they who cannot reade might safely be ignorant that Melchisedeck was King of Salem but he who reads it in the Scripture may not safely contradict it although before that knowledge did arrive to him he might safely have been ignorant of it But this although it be true is not pertinent to our Question For in sensu diviso this is true that which at one time a man may be ignorant of at some other time he may not disbelieve but in sensu conjuncto it is false for at what and in what circumstance soever it is no sin to be ignorant at that time and in that conjuncture it is no sin to disbelieve And such is the nature of all Questions disputable which are therefore not required of us to be believed in any one particular sense because the nature of the thing is such as not to be necessary to be known at all simply and absolutely and